Planet's Tougher Problems Persist, UN Report Warns
Nairobi/New York, 25 October:
The United Nations Environment Programme says that major threats to the planet such as climate change, the rate of extinction of species, and the challenge of feeding a growing population are among the many that remain unresolved, and all of them put humanity at risk.
The warning comes in UNEP's Global Environment Outlook: environment for development (GEO-4) report published 20 years after the World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Commission) produced its seminal report, Our Common Future.
GEO-4, the latest in UNEP's series of flagship reports, assesses the current state of the global atmosphere, land, water and biodiversity, describes the changes since 1987, and identifies priorities for action. GEO-4 is the most comprehensive UN report on the environment, prepared by about 390 experts and reviewed by more than 1 000 others across the world.
It salutes the world's progress in tackling some relatively straightforward problems, with the environment now much closer to mainstream politics everywhere. But despite these advances, there remain the harder-to-manage issues, the "persistent" problems. Here, GEO-4 says:
"There are no major issues raised in Our Common Future for which the foreseeable trends are favourable."
Failure to address these persistent problems, UNEP says, may undo all the achievements so far on the simpler issues, and may threaten humanity's survival. But it insists: "The objective is not to present a dark and gloomy scenario, but an urgent call for action."
Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director, said: "The international community's response to the Brundtland Commission has in some cases been courageous and inspiring. But all too often it has been slow and at a pace and scale that fails to respond to or recognize the magnitude of the challenges facing the people and the environment of the planet".
"Over the past 20 years, the international community has cut, by 95 per cent, the production of ozone-layer damaging chemicals; created a greenhouse gas emission reduction treaty along with innovative carbon trading and carbon offset markets; supported a rise in terrestrial protected areas to cover roughly 12 per cent of the Earth and devised numerous important instruments covering issues from biodiversity and desertification to the trade in hazardous wastes and living modified organisms," he added.
"But, as GEO-4 points out, there continue to be 'persistent' and intractable problems unresolved and unaddressed. Past issues remain and new ones are emerging?from the rapid rise of oxygen 'dead zones' in the oceans to the resurgence of new and old diseases linked in part with environmental degradation. Meanwhile, institutions like UNEP, established to counter the root causes, remain under-resourced and weak," said Mr Steiner.
On climate change the report says the threat is now so urgent that large cuts in greenhouse gases by mid-century are needed. Negotiations are due to start in December on a treaty to replace the Kyoto Protocol, the international climate agreement which
obligates countries to control anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Although it exempts all developing countries from emission reduction commitments, there is growing pressure for some rapidly-industrializing countries, now substantial emitters themselves, to agree to emission reductions.
GEO-4 also warns that we are living far beyond our means. The human population is now so large that "the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available... humanity's footprint [its environmental demand] is 21.9 hectares per person while the Earth's biological capacity is, on average, only 15.7 ha/person...".
And it says the well-being of billions of people in the developing world is at risk, because of a failure to remedy the relatively simple problems which have been successfully tackled elsewhere.
GEO-4 recalls the Brundtland Commission's statement that the world does not face separate crises - the "environmental crisis", "development crisis", and "energy crisis" are all one. This crisis includes not just climate change, extinction rates and hunger, but other problems driven by growing human numbers, the rising consumption of the rich and the desperation of the poor.
Examples are:
- decline of fish stocks;
- loss of fertile land through degradation;
- unsustainable pressure on resources;
- dwindling amount of fresh water available for humans and other creatures to share; and
- risk that environmental damage could pass unknown points of no return.
GEO-4 says climate change is a "global priority", demanding political will and leadership. Yet it finds "a remarkable lack of urgency", and a "woefully inadequate" global response.
Several highly-polluting countries have refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. GEO-4 says: "... some industrial sectors that were unfavourable to the... Protocol managed successfully to undermine the political will to ratify it." It says: "Fundamental changes in social and economic structures, including lifestyle changes, are crucial if rapid progress is to be achieved."
Among the other critical points it identifies are:
Water: Irrigation already takes about 70 per cent of available water, yet meeting the Millennium Development Goal on hunger will mean doubling food production by 2050. Fresh water is declining: by 2025, water use is predicted to have risen by 50 per cent in developing countries and by 18 per cent in the developed world. GEO-4 says: "The escalating burden of water demand will become intolerable in water-scarce countries."
Water quality is declining too, polluted by microbial pathogens and excessive nutrients. Globally, contaminated water remains the greatest single cause of human disease and death.
Fish: Consumption more than tripled from 1961 to 2001. Catches have stagnated or slowly declined since the 1980s. Subsidies have created excess fishing capacity, estimated at 250 per cent more than is needed to catch the oceans' sustainable production.
Biodiversity: Current biodiversity changes are the fastest in human history. Species are becoming extinct a hundred times faster than the rate shown in the fossil record. The Congo Basin's bushmeat trade is thought to be six times the sustainable rate. Of the major vertebrate groups that have been assessed comprehensively, over 30 per cent of amphibians, 23 per cent of mammals and 12 per cent of birds are threatened.
The intrusion of invasive alien species is a growing problem. The comb jellyfish, accidentally introduced in 1982 by US ships, has taken over the entire marine ecosystem of the Black Sea, and had destroyed 26 commercial fisheries by 1992.
A sixth major extinction is under way, this time caused by human behaviour. Yet to meet our growing demand for food will mean either intensified agriculture (using more chemicals, energy and water, and more efficient breeds and crops) or cultivating more land. Either way, biodiversity suffers.
One sign of progress is the steady increase in protected areas. But they must be effectively managed and properly enforced. And biodiversity (of all sorts, not just the "charismatic megafauna" like tigers and elephants) will increasingly need conserving outside protected areas as well.
Regional Pressures: This is the first GEO report in which all seven of the world's regions emphasize the potential impacts of climate change. In Africa, land degradation and even desertification are threats; per capita food production has declined by 12 per cent since 1981.
Unfair agricultural subsidies in developed regions continue to hinder progress towards increasing yields. Priorities for Asia and the Pacific include urban air quality, fresh water stress, degraded ecosystems, agricultural land use and increased waste. Drinking water provision has made remarkable progress in the last decade, but the illegal traffic in electronic and hazardous waste is a new challenge. Europe's rising incomes and growing numbers of households are leading to unsustainable production and consumption, higher energy use, poor urban air quality, and transport problems. The region's other priorities are biodiversity loss, land-use change and freshwater stresses.
Latin America and the Caribbean face urban growth, biodiversity threats, coastal damage and marine pollution, and vulnerability to climate change. But protected areas now cover about 12 per cent of the land, and annual deforestation rates in the Amazon are falling. North America is struggling to address climate change, to which energy use, urban sprawl and freshwater stresses are all linked. Energy efficiency gains have been countered by the use of larger vehicles, low fuel economy standards, and increases in car numbers and distances travelled. For West Asia the priorities are freshwater stresses, degradation of land, coasts and marine ecosystems, urban management, and peace and security. Water-borne diseases and the sharing of international water resources are also concerns. The Polar Regions are already feeling the impacts of climate change. The food security and health of indigenous peoples are at risk from increasing mercury and persistent organic pollutants in the environment. The ozone layer is expected to take another half-century to recover.
The FutureGEO-4 acknowledges that technology can help to reduce people's vulnerability to environmental stresses, but says there is sometimes a need "to correct the technology-centred development paradigm". It explores how current trends may unfold by 2050 in four scenarios.
The real future will be largely determined by the decisions individuals and society make now, GEO-4 says: "Our common future depends on our actions today, not tomorrow or some time in the future."
For some of the persistent problems the damage may already be irreversible. GEO-4 warns that tackling the underlying causes of environmental pressures often affects the vested interests of powerful groups able to influence policy decisions. The only way to address these harder problems requires moving the environment from the periphery to the core of decision-making: environment for development, not development to the detriment of environment.
"There have been enough wake-up calls since Brundtland. I sincerely hope GEO-4 is the final one. The systematic destruction of the Earth's natural and nature-based resources has reached a point where the economic viability of economies is being challenged and where the bill we hand on to our children may prove impossible to pay," said Mr Steiner.
The GEO-4 report concludes that "while governments are expected to take the lead, other stakeholders are just as important to ensure success in achieving sustainable development. The need couldn't be more urgent and the time couldn't be more opportune, with our enhanced understanding of the challenges we face, to act now to safeguard our own survival and that of future generations" ends.
http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=519&ArticleID=5688&l=en
Full report available from below link:
http://www.unep.org/geo/geo4/report/GEO-4_Report_Full_en.pdf
Friday, October 26, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
The World's Priorities?
Estimated annual cost to provide universal access to basic social services in all developing countries (source UNDP). Figures are from 1997
Basic education $6 billion (we spend $8 billion on cosmetics in the US)
(we spend $50billion on cigarettes in Europe)
Water and sanitation $9 billion (we spend $11 billion on icecream in Europe)
(we spend 105 billion on alcohol in Europe)
Reproductive Health $12 billion (we spend $12 billion on perfume in Europe and US)
(we spend $400billion on narcotics in the world)
Basic Health and nutrition $13 billion (we spend $17 billion on pet food in Europe and US)
(we spend $780 billion on the military worldwide)
Basic education $6 billion (we spend $8 billion on cosmetics in the US)
(we spend $50billion on cigarettes in Europe)
Water and sanitation $9 billion (we spend $11 billion on icecream in Europe)
(we spend 105 billion on alcohol in Europe)
Reproductive Health $12 billion (we spend $12 billion on perfume in Europe and US)
(we spend $400billion on narcotics in the world)
Basic Health and nutrition $13 billion (we spend $17 billion on pet food in Europe and US)
(we spend $780 billion on the military worldwide)
Look at the state of the Earth
Marian Wilkinson
Environment Editor
SMH
October 26, 2007
The most authoritative scientific report on the planet's health has found water, land, air, plants, animals and fish stocks are all in "inexorable decline" as 2007 became the first year in human history when most of the world's population lived in cities.
The United Nations' Global Environment Outlook-4 report, released in New York, reveals a scale of unprecedented ecological damage, with more than 2 million people possibly dying prematurely of air pollution and close to 2 billion likely to suffer absolute water scarcity by 2025.
Put bluntly, the report warns that the 6.75 billion world population, "has reached a stage where the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available".
And it says climate change, the collapse of fish stocks and the extinction of species "may threaten humanity's very survival".
Launching the report, the head of the UN's Environment Program, Achim Steiner, warned that, "without an accelerated effort to reform the way we collectively do business on planet earth, we will shortly be in trouble, if indeed we are not already".
One of the most disturbing findings is that environmental exposures are now causing almost one quarter of all diseases including respiratory disease, cancers, and emerging animal-to-human disease transfer.
Pressure on the global water supply has also become a serious threat to human development as the demand for irrigated crops soars. The report estimates that only one in 10 of the world's major rivers reaches the sea all year round because of upstream irrigation demands.
Each person's "environmental footprint" has on average grown to 22 hectares of the planet but the report estimates the "biological carrying capacity" is somewhere between 15 and 16 hectares per person.
Critically, fish stocks, a key protein source for several billion people, are in crisis. About 30 per cent of global fish stocks are classed as "collapsed" and 40 per cent are described as "over-exploited".
The exploitation of land for agriculture has hugely increased as populations increase and living standards rise. A hectare of land that once produced 1.8 tonnes of crops in 1987 now produces 2.5 tonnes. But that rise in productivity has been made possible by a greater use of fertilisers and water leading to land degradation and pollution.
"The food security of two-thirds of the world's people depends on fertilisers, especially nitrogen," the report says. In turn, the nutrients running off farmland are increasingly causing algal blooms. In the Gulf of Mexico and the Baltic Sea these have created huge "dead zones" without oxygen.
The report estimates that all species, including animals and plants, are becoming extinct at rates 100 times faster than those shown from the past in fossil records. The main causes include land clearing for agriculture, over-exploitation and pollution. Of the major species assessed, 23 per cent of mammals and 12 per cent of birds are threatened with extinction.
Genetic diversity is also shrinking as just 14 animal species account for 90 per cent of all livestock production and 30 crops dominate global agriculture. But overwhelmingly, the report finds that climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions poses the gravest danger to the future of the planet. The authors note "a remarkable lack of urgency" in tackling human-induced global warming and, in a criticism of the Australia and the US, it notes that "several highly-emitting countries have refused to ratify the global climate change treaty, the Kyoto Protocol".
Significantly, Mr Steiner said last night be believed the governments were "finally turning the corner" on dealing with climate change.
"The momentum on climate change in 2007 is nothing short of breathtaking", he said. "It is time to find the same sense of urgency on biodiversity and degradation, on fisheries and freshwater".
Mr Steiner noted important progress in some areas, cuts in air pollution in Europe and cuts to overfishing in the Pacific. And he stressed that the authors of the report insist that its objective "is not to present a dark and gloomy scenario but an urgent call for action".
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/population-pressure-takes-earth-to-its-limits/2007/10/25/1192941241428.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Environment Editor
SMH
October 26, 2007
The most authoritative scientific report on the planet's health has found water, land, air, plants, animals and fish stocks are all in "inexorable decline" as 2007 became the first year in human history when most of the world's population lived in cities.
The United Nations' Global Environment Outlook-4 report, released in New York, reveals a scale of unprecedented ecological damage, with more than 2 million people possibly dying prematurely of air pollution and close to 2 billion likely to suffer absolute water scarcity by 2025.
Put bluntly, the report warns that the 6.75 billion world population, "has reached a stage where the amount of resources needed to sustain it exceeds what is available".
And it says climate change, the collapse of fish stocks and the extinction of species "may threaten humanity's very survival".
Launching the report, the head of the UN's Environment Program, Achim Steiner, warned that, "without an accelerated effort to reform the way we collectively do business on planet earth, we will shortly be in trouble, if indeed we are not already".
One of the most disturbing findings is that environmental exposures are now causing almost one quarter of all diseases including respiratory disease, cancers, and emerging animal-to-human disease transfer.
Pressure on the global water supply has also become a serious threat to human development as the demand for irrigated crops soars. The report estimates that only one in 10 of the world's major rivers reaches the sea all year round because of upstream irrigation demands.
Each person's "environmental footprint" has on average grown to 22 hectares of the planet but the report estimates the "biological carrying capacity" is somewhere between 15 and 16 hectares per person.
Critically, fish stocks, a key protein source for several billion people, are in crisis. About 30 per cent of global fish stocks are classed as "collapsed" and 40 per cent are described as "over-exploited".
The exploitation of land for agriculture has hugely increased as populations increase and living standards rise. A hectare of land that once produced 1.8 tonnes of crops in 1987 now produces 2.5 tonnes. But that rise in productivity has been made possible by a greater use of fertilisers and water leading to land degradation and pollution.
"The food security of two-thirds of the world's people depends on fertilisers, especially nitrogen," the report says. In turn, the nutrients running off farmland are increasingly causing algal blooms. In the Gulf of Mexico and the Baltic Sea these have created huge "dead zones" without oxygen.
The report estimates that all species, including animals and plants, are becoming extinct at rates 100 times faster than those shown from the past in fossil records. The main causes include land clearing for agriculture, over-exploitation and pollution. Of the major species assessed, 23 per cent of mammals and 12 per cent of birds are threatened with extinction.
Genetic diversity is also shrinking as just 14 animal species account for 90 per cent of all livestock production and 30 crops dominate global agriculture. But overwhelmingly, the report finds that climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions poses the gravest danger to the future of the planet. The authors note "a remarkable lack of urgency" in tackling human-induced global warming and, in a criticism of the Australia and the US, it notes that "several highly-emitting countries have refused to ratify the global climate change treaty, the Kyoto Protocol".
Significantly, Mr Steiner said last night be believed the governments were "finally turning the corner" on dealing with climate change.
"The momentum on climate change in 2007 is nothing short of breathtaking", he said. "It is time to find the same sense of urgency on biodiversity and degradation, on fisheries and freshwater".
Mr Steiner noted important progress in some areas, cuts in air pollution in Europe and cuts to overfishing in the Pacific. And he stressed that the authors of the report insist that its objective "is not to present a dark and gloomy scenario but an urgent call for action".
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/population-pressure-takes-earth-to-its-limits/2007/10/25/1192941241428.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Poor Turtle
More than a million seabirds, 100,000 marine mammals, and countless fish die in the North Pacific each year, either from mistakenly eating plastic or from being ensnared in it and drowning.
Friday, October 19, 2007
How climate change will affect the world
David Adam
The Guardian
Wednesday September 19 2007
The effects of climate change will be felt sooner than scientists realised and the world must learn to live with the effects, experts said yesterday.
Martin Parry, a climate scientist with the Met Office, said destructive changes in temperature, rainfall and agriculture were now forecast to occur several decades earlier than thought. He said vulnerable people such as the old and poor would be the worst affected, and that world leaders had not yet accepted their countries would have to adapt to the likely consequences.
Speaking at a meeting to launch the full report on the impacts of global warming by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Professor Parry, co-chairman of the IPCC working group that wrote the report, said: "We are all used to talking about these impacts coming in the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren. Now we know that it's us."
He added politicians had wasted a decade by focusing only on ways to cut emissions, and had only recently woken up to the need to adapt. "Mitigation has got all the attention, but we cannot mitigate out of this problem. We now have a choice between a future with a damaged world or a severely damaged world."
The international response to the problem has failed to grasp that serious consequences such as reduced crop yields and water shortages are now inevitable, he said. Countries such as Britain need to focus on helping nations in the developing world cope with the predicted impacts, by helping them to introduce irrigation and water management technology, drought resistant crops and new building techniques.
Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, said: "Wheat production in India is already in decline, for no other reason than climate change. Everyone thought we didn't have to worry about Indian agriculture for several decades. Now we know it's being affected now." There are signs a similar shift is under way in China, he added.
The summary chapter of yesterday's report was published in April, after arguments between scientists and political officials over its contents. Prof Parry said: "Governments don't like numbers, so some numbers were brushed out of it."
The report warns that Africa and the Arctic will bear the brunt of climate impacts, along with small islands such as Fiji, and Asian river megadeltas including the Mekong.
It says extreme weather events are likely to become more intense and more frequent, and the effect on ecosystems could be severe, with up to 30% of plant and animal species at risk of extinction if the average rise in global temperatures exceeds 1.5C-2.5C. The consequences of rising temperatures are already being felt on every continent, it adds.
Prof Parry said it was "very unlikely" that average temperature rise could be limited to 2C, as sought by European governments. That would place 2 billion more people at risk of water shortages, and hundreds of millions more will face hunger, the report says.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/19/climatechange
The Guardian
Wednesday September 19 2007
The effects of climate change will be felt sooner than scientists realised and the world must learn to live with the effects, experts said yesterday.
Martin Parry, a climate scientist with the Met Office, said destructive changes in temperature, rainfall and agriculture were now forecast to occur several decades earlier than thought. He said vulnerable people such as the old and poor would be the worst affected, and that world leaders had not yet accepted their countries would have to adapt to the likely consequences.
Speaking at a meeting to launch the full report on the impacts of global warming by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Professor Parry, co-chairman of the IPCC working group that wrote the report, said: "We are all used to talking about these impacts coming in the lifetimes of our children and grandchildren. Now we know that it's us."
He added politicians had wasted a decade by focusing only on ways to cut emissions, and had only recently woken up to the need to adapt. "Mitigation has got all the attention, but we cannot mitigate out of this problem. We now have a choice between a future with a damaged world or a severely damaged world."
The international response to the problem has failed to grasp that serious consequences such as reduced crop yields and water shortages are now inevitable, he said. Countries such as Britain need to focus on helping nations in the developing world cope with the predicted impacts, by helping them to introduce irrigation and water management technology, drought resistant crops and new building techniques.
Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, said: "Wheat production in India is already in decline, for no other reason than climate change. Everyone thought we didn't have to worry about Indian agriculture for several decades. Now we know it's being affected now." There are signs a similar shift is under way in China, he added.
The summary chapter of yesterday's report was published in April, after arguments between scientists and political officials over its contents. Prof Parry said: "Governments don't like numbers, so some numbers were brushed out of it."
The report warns that Africa and the Arctic will bear the brunt of climate impacts, along with small islands such as Fiji, and Asian river megadeltas including the Mekong.
It says extreme weather events are likely to become more intense and more frequent, and the effect on ecosystems could be severe, with up to 30% of plant and animal species at risk of extinction if the average rise in global temperatures exceeds 1.5C-2.5C. The consequences of rising temperatures are already being felt on every continent, it adds.
Prof Parry said it was "very unlikely" that average temperature rise could be limited to 2C, as sought by European governments. That would place 2 billion more people at risk of water shortages, and hundreds of millions more will face hunger, the report says.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/19/climatechange
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
UNDP - Millennium Development Goals
Target: Halve the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day and those who suffer from hunger.
Target: Ensure that all boys and girls complete primary school.
Target: Eliminate gender disparities in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all levels by 2015.
Target: Reduce by two thirds the mortality rate among children under five.
Target: Reduce by three quarters the maternal mortality ratio.
Target: Halt and begin to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Target: Halt and begin to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases.
Target: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources
Target: Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water
Target: Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020
Goal 8 of the Millennium Development Goals sets out by the year 2015 to:
- Develop further an open trading and financial system that is rule-based, predictable and non-discriminatory. Includes a commitment to good governance, development and poverty reduction—nationally and internationally.
- Address the least developed countries’ special needs. This includes tariff- and quota-free access for their exports; enhanced debt relief for heavily indebted poor countries; cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous official development assistance for countries committed to poverty reduction.
- Address the special needs of landlocked and small island developing States.
Deal comprehensively with developing countries’ debt problems through national and international measures to make debt sustainable in the long term
Deal comprehensively with developing countries’ debt problems through national and international measures to make debt sustainable in the long term
- In cooperation with the developing countries, develop decent and productive work for youth.
- In cooperation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable essential drugs in developing countries.
- In cooperation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies—especially information and communications technologies.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
How green is NSW living? now we can tell
September 12, 2007
SMH
Over the past few weeks there has been a running commentary on the effect of the crisis in the US subprime mortgage market on the Australian sharemarket.
When it emerged we saw record falls on the Australian market. When the US Federal Reserve intervened, confidence was restored and the sharemarket surged upwards.
We love watching numbers go up and down. Even if they don't move, they seem to spark interest.
And if it is reported, it must matter.
Of course, this is not restricted to the sharemarket. We know we want dam levels to rise, the dollar to rise (unless you are a farmer), pollen levels to be low and mortgage rates to go down.
But do you know what happened with our greenhouse gas emissions last week? Did they go up? Stabilise? Or, more hopefully, go down? Do you have any idea how much NSW emitted?
With climate change one of the most critical issues facing the planet and our release of greenhouse gases critical to this, this seems to be a significant oversight.
It would be good if we took as much interest in how greenhouse gas emissions were tracking as we did in other indicators. There is little doubt that reports on dam levels helped raise awareness of the need to save water and contributed to cutting water use. If we had weekly information on how much greenhouse gas we produced, perhaps we would realise that rather than cutting our emissions, we were actually increasing them.
This year the Climate Group introduced in Victoria a weekly indicator of greenhouse emissions.
From today, NSW will also be able to track greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired electricity, natural gas-fired electricity and petroleum products.
The NSW Greenhouse Indicator - on the facing page - keeps an account of about 65per cent of NSW greenhouse gas emissions. Remaining emissions come from agriculture, waste and industry. Surprisingly, information on emissions like this is not provided weekly anywhere else in the world. As in other countries, the Federal Government releases an annual report a couple of years after the emissions.This data, while comprehensive and critical for policy planning and scientific assessment, is too slow for us to respond to in the manner necessary to tackle this problem.
The good news is that there are many ways to make substantial cuts to greenhouse gas emissions now, without a huge cost.
As the indicator shows, our biggest source of greenhouse gas is coal-fired electricity. By buying government-accredited GreenPower, you can eliminate overnight all the emissions produced from electricity.
Driving your car more efficiently, walking or cycling more often, or catching public transport, or buying a more fuel-efficient car can help slash petroleum emissions.
Rupert Posner is the Australian director of The Climate Group. (www.theclimategroup.org/indicator). Check the Herald each Wednesday for latest greenhouse gas figures.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/how-green-is-nsw-living-now-we-can-tell/2007/09/11/1189276719766.html
SMH
Over the past few weeks there has been a running commentary on the effect of the crisis in the US subprime mortgage market on the Australian sharemarket.
When it emerged we saw record falls on the Australian market. When the US Federal Reserve intervened, confidence was restored and the sharemarket surged upwards.
We love watching numbers go up and down. Even if they don't move, they seem to spark interest.
And if it is reported, it must matter.
Of course, this is not restricted to the sharemarket. We know we want dam levels to rise, the dollar to rise (unless you are a farmer), pollen levels to be low and mortgage rates to go down.
But do you know what happened with our greenhouse gas emissions last week? Did they go up? Stabilise? Or, more hopefully, go down? Do you have any idea how much NSW emitted?
With climate change one of the most critical issues facing the planet and our release of greenhouse gases critical to this, this seems to be a significant oversight.
It would be good if we took as much interest in how greenhouse gas emissions were tracking as we did in other indicators. There is little doubt that reports on dam levels helped raise awareness of the need to save water and contributed to cutting water use. If we had weekly information on how much greenhouse gas we produced, perhaps we would realise that rather than cutting our emissions, we were actually increasing them.
This year the Climate Group introduced in Victoria a weekly indicator of greenhouse emissions.
From today, NSW will also be able to track greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired electricity, natural gas-fired electricity and petroleum products.
The NSW Greenhouse Indicator - on the facing page - keeps an account of about 65per cent of NSW greenhouse gas emissions. Remaining emissions come from agriculture, waste and industry. Surprisingly, information on emissions like this is not provided weekly anywhere else in the world. As in other countries, the Federal Government releases an annual report a couple of years after the emissions.This data, while comprehensive and critical for policy planning and scientific assessment, is too slow for us to respond to in the manner necessary to tackle this problem.
The good news is that there are many ways to make substantial cuts to greenhouse gas emissions now, without a huge cost.
As the indicator shows, our biggest source of greenhouse gas is coal-fired electricity. By buying government-accredited GreenPower, you can eliminate overnight all the emissions produced from electricity.
Driving your car more efficiently, walking or cycling more often, or catching public transport, or buying a more fuel-efficient car can help slash petroleum emissions.
Rupert Posner is the Australian director of The Climate Group. (www.theclimategroup.org/indicator). Check the Herald each Wednesday for latest greenhouse gas figures.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/how-green-is-nsw-living-now-we-can-tell/2007/09/11/1189276719766.html
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Making up for carbon emissions
Saturday, 09/01/07
Even on the environment, people get what they pay forToday's Topic: Making up for carbon emissions
Our View
It is probably a sad commentary on modern society that even on something like a clean environment, rather than do the hard part, people think they can just pay for it.
A trend toward purchasing "carbon offsets" is a recent example.
The Washington Post recently reported on how organizations are popping up, offering people a chance to "offset" their polluting ways, such as offsetting the drive to work in a gas-fueled car by paying into a program where clean steps — like planting trees — can be purchased.
If someone can write a check and know with certainty that they are helping the environment equal to their polluting ways, more power to them. It appears many organizations offering offsets for purchase have the best of motives. But scientists are beginning to question whether all of those groups deliver on exactly what they're selling. For example, if someone uses a credit card to pay for a $100 offset, how can they know for certain that the carbon offset will really be exactly what they paid for? The process, though well intended, could very well become just a feel-good way to "help" the environment without creating any real benefit.
The concept of offsets is certainly not limited to individual purchases. The theory is discussed in broader policy terms, where regions, even countries, could buy and trade credits on carbon emissions. But putting a specific dollar amount on offsets can be hard to get down to an exact science. There seems to be little doubt that offset sellers do attempt to apply the funds toward the noble purpose of cleaning up the environment, like putting the funds into a wind power program. But if people feel a purchase gives them license to then drive guilt-free, it leaves the question of precisely how much good is being done. It also leads to the question of whether they feel they can drive even more since they've paid for an offset.
Fortunately, the practice has gotten the attention of Congress. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., has requested that the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Trade Commission consider setting standards for such offset operations. As long as the concept is sound, and as long as there are good-faith efforts at work, the premise should be pursued. But it doesn't take long to see that such efforts could fall short of what is promised, and it doesn't take long to see that such purchases could be fodder for abuse.
According to the Post report, the Sierra Club suggests that instead of spending $100 on a carbon offset, it would be better to invest $100 in something like fluorescent light bulbs. Conservation and common sense should factor more into people's thinking than the belief that a cleaner earth is possible just by writing a check. There is actual work involved in improving the environment.
Putting money into a good idea is one thing. Actually cleaning up the planet can be something else.
http://www.rctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070901/OPINION01/709010325/1007/MTCN0305
Even on the environment, people get what they pay forToday's Topic: Making up for carbon emissions
Our View
It is probably a sad commentary on modern society that even on something like a clean environment, rather than do the hard part, people think they can just pay for it.
A trend toward purchasing "carbon offsets" is a recent example.
The Washington Post recently reported on how organizations are popping up, offering people a chance to "offset" their polluting ways, such as offsetting the drive to work in a gas-fueled car by paying into a program where clean steps — like planting trees — can be purchased.
If someone can write a check and know with certainty that they are helping the environment equal to their polluting ways, more power to them. It appears many organizations offering offsets for purchase have the best of motives. But scientists are beginning to question whether all of those groups deliver on exactly what they're selling. For example, if someone uses a credit card to pay for a $100 offset, how can they know for certain that the carbon offset will really be exactly what they paid for? The process, though well intended, could very well become just a feel-good way to "help" the environment without creating any real benefit.
The concept of offsets is certainly not limited to individual purchases. The theory is discussed in broader policy terms, where regions, even countries, could buy and trade credits on carbon emissions. But putting a specific dollar amount on offsets can be hard to get down to an exact science. There seems to be little doubt that offset sellers do attempt to apply the funds toward the noble purpose of cleaning up the environment, like putting the funds into a wind power program. But if people feel a purchase gives them license to then drive guilt-free, it leaves the question of precisely how much good is being done. It also leads to the question of whether they feel they can drive even more since they've paid for an offset.
Fortunately, the practice has gotten the attention of Congress. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., has requested that the Environmental Protection Agency and the Federal Trade Commission consider setting standards for such offset operations. As long as the concept is sound, and as long as there are good-faith efforts at work, the premise should be pursued. But it doesn't take long to see that such efforts could fall short of what is promised, and it doesn't take long to see that such purchases could be fodder for abuse.
According to the Post report, the Sierra Club suggests that instead of spending $100 on a carbon offset, it would be better to invest $100 in something like fluorescent light bulbs. Conservation and common sense should factor more into people's thinking than the belief that a cleaner earth is possible just by writing a check. There is actual work involved in improving the environment.
Putting money into a good idea is one thing. Actually cleaning up the planet can be something else.
http://www.rctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070901/OPINION01/709010325/1007/MTCN0305
End game for Mugabe 'could be in sight'
Saturday September 1
AAP
The "end game" for Zimbabwe's president Robert Mugabe could be in sight, the African country's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai said as he wound up a week-long Australian visit.
The leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was also forced on Saturday to defend claims from within the Mugabe regime, that his visit was to encourage further sanctions against his crisis-hit country.
"There have been accusations that I am here to advocate for sanctions against the country. Far from it," Mr Tsvangirai told reporters before flying out of Sydney.
"We would like to engage all democratic progressive governments in the world, to draw their attention to (Zimbabwe's) crisis.
"I'm sure that in engaging some of the progressive democratic nations of the world we are advancing the interests of Zimbabwe rather than undermining Zimbabwe."
Mr Tsvangirai said March next year would see the staging of presidential along with parliamentary and local government elections in Zimbabwe.
South African president Thabo Mbeki has taken on a mediation role ahead of the elections and Mr Tsvangirai said he hoped this would lead to a demilitarisation of the electoral process, international observers and also give Zimbabwe's diaspora the vote.
"If we were to go through a similar exercise we have had over the last three elections it will be a pre-determined outcome," Mr Tsvangirai said.
"But if there are free and fair election conditions, there is no doubt in my mind that the people will win.
"The people in Zimbabwe are very much conscious of their dire straits ... they are also conscious that the end-game is probably near."
Mr Tsvangirai said his country was in the midst of an economic catastrophe with up to six million people dependent on food aid, widespread unemployment and inflation at a run-away 12,000 per cent.
"The nearest country with the next high rate of inflation is Burma only at 37 per cent," Mr Tsvangirai said.
"It is in freefall, this is an economy that has shrunk almost 60 per cent.
"The situation is dangerous because unless the haemorrhage is stopped we may actually have a serious collapse."
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070712/2/13y9w.html
AAP
The "end game" for Zimbabwe's president Robert Mugabe could be in sight, the African country's opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai said as he wound up a week-long Australian visit.
The leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was also forced on Saturday to defend claims from within the Mugabe regime, that his visit was to encourage further sanctions against his crisis-hit country.
"There have been accusations that I am here to advocate for sanctions against the country. Far from it," Mr Tsvangirai told reporters before flying out of Sydney.
"We would like to engage all democratic progressive governments in the world, to draw their attention to (Zimbabwe's) crisis.
"I'm sure that in engaging some of the progressive democratic nations of the world we are advancing the interests of Zimbabwe rather than undermining Zimbabwe."
Mr Tsvangirai said March next year would see the staging of presidential along with parliamentary and local government elections in Zimbabwe.
South African president Thabo Mbeki has taken on a mediation role ahead of the elections and Mr Tsvangirai said he hoped this would lead to a demilitarisation of the electoral process, international observers and also give Zimbabwe's diaspora the vote.
"If we were to go through a similar exercise we have had over the last three elections it will be a pre-determined outcome," Mr Tsvangirai said.
"But if there are free and fair election conditions, there is no doubt in my mind that the people will win.
"The people in Zimbabwe are very much conscious of their dire straits ... they are also conscious that the end-game is probably near."
Mr Tsvangirai said his country was in the midst of an economic catastrophe with up to six million people dependent on food aid, widespread unemployment and inflation at a run-away 12,000 per cent.
"The nearest country with the next high rate of inflation is Burma only at 37 per cent," Mr Tsvangirai said.
"It is in freefall, this is an economy that has shrunk almost 60 per cent.
"The situation is dangerous because unless the haemorrhage is stopped we may actually have a serious collapse."
http://au.news.yahoo.com/070712/2/13y9w.html
Friday, August 31, 2007
Industrial nations agree step to new climate pact
By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent
Fri Aug 31, 2007
Reuters
VIENNA - Industrial nations agreed on Friday to consider stiff 2020 goals for cutting greenhouse gases in a small step towards a new long-term pact to fight climate change.
About 1,000 delegates at the Aug 27-31 U.N. talks set greenhouse gas emissions cuts of between 25 and 40 percent below 1990 levels as a non-binding starting point for rich nations' work on a new pact to extend the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012.
"These conclusions...indicate what industrialized countries must do to show leadership," said Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, welcoming a compromise deal on the range of needed cuts.
"But more needs to be done by the global community," he told a news conference at the end of the 158-nation talks. Many countries want to broaden Kyoto to include targets for outsiders such as the United States and developing nations.
Delegates agreed that the 25-40 percent range "provides useful initial parameters for the overall level of ambition of further emissions reductions."
It fell short of calls by the European Union and developing nations for the range to be called a stronger "guide" for future work. Pacific Island states said that even stiffer cuts may be needed to avert rising seas that could wash them off the map.
Nations including Russia, Japan and Canada had objected to the idea of a "guide," reckoning it might end up binding them to make sweeping economic shifts away from fossil fuels, widely seen as a main cause of global warming.
Delegates in the Vienna conference hall applauded for 10 seconds after adopting the compromise text by consensus.
STARTING POINT
"This is a small step," Artur Runge-Metzger, head of the EU Commission delegation, told Reuters. "We wanted bigger steps. But I think the 25-40 percent will be viewed as a starting point, an anchor for further work."
The U.N.'s climate panel said in a study in May 2007 that rich nations would have to cut emissions by between 25 and 40 percent to help avert the worst impacts of climate change from droughts, storms, heatwaves and rising seas.
"The process is moving along," said Leon Charles from Grenada, who chaired the final session. "By and large we have achieved our objectives."
De Boer said that the decisions might help environment ministers who will meet in Bali, Indonesia, in December, to agree to launch formal negotiations on a new global climate treaty to be decided by the end of 2009.
"This meeting has put the Bali conference in the starting blocks," de Boer said.
Environmentalists also hailed the conclusions as a step in the right direction. "The road to Bali is clear but it's time to switch gears," said Red Constantino of Greenpeace.
"We have a clear message from most governments that they will take seriously" scientists' calls for deep cuts, said Hans Verolme, climate expert of the WWF.
Kyoto binds 36 industrial nations to cut emissions of greenhouse gases by at least 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12 in a first bid to contain warming.
The United States has not ratified Kyoto, rating it too costly and unfair for excluding 2012 goals for developing states, and thus was not involved in Friday's session. President George W. Bush has separately called a meeting of major emitters in Washington on September 27-28 to work out future cuts.
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2007-08-31T202715Z_01_L30699785_RTRIDST_0_CANADA-CLIMATE-COL.XML
Fri Aug 31, 2007
Reuters
VIENNA - Industrial nations agreed on Friday to consider stiff 2020 goals for cutting greenhouse gases in a small step towards a new long-term pact to fight climate change.
About 1,000 delegates at the Aug 27-31 U.N. talks set greenhouse gas emissions cuts of between 25 and 40 percent below 1990 levels as a non-binding starting point for rich nations' work on a new pact to extend the U.N.'s Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012.
"These conclusions...indicate what industrialized countries must do to show leadership," said Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, welcoming a compromise deal on the range of needed cuts.
"But more needs to be done by the global community," he told a news conference at the end of the 158-nation talks. Many countries want to broaden Kyoto to include targets for outsiders such as the United States and developing nations.
Delegates agreed that the 25-40 percent range "provides useful initial parameters for the overall level of ambition of further emissions reductions."
It fell short of calls by the European Union and developing nations for the range to be called a stronger "guide" for future work. Pacific Island states said that even stiffer cuts may be needed to avert rising seas that could wash them off the map.
Nations including Russia, Japan and Canada had objected to the idea of a "guide," reckoning it might end up binding them to make sweeping economic shifts away from fossil fuels, widely seen as a main cause of global warming.
Delegates in the Vienna conference hall applauded for 10 seconds after adopting the compromise text by consensus.
STARTING POINT
"This is a small step," Artur Runge-Metzger, head of the EU Commission delegation, told Reuters. "We wanted bigger steps. But I think the 25-40 percent will be viewed as a starting point, an anchor for further work."
The U.N.'s climate panel said in a study in May 2007 that rich nations would have to cut emissions by between 25 and 40 percent to help avert the worst impacts of climate change from droughts, storms, heatwaves and rising seas.
"The process is moving along," said Leon Charles from Grenada, who chaired the final session. "By and large we have achieved our objectives."
De Boer said that the decisions might help environment ministers who will meet in Bali, Indonesia, in December, to agree to launch formal negotiations on a new global climate treaty to be decided by the end of 2009.
"This meeting has put the Bali conference in the starting blocks," de Boer said.
Environmentalists also hailed the conclusions as a step in the right direction. "The road to Bali is clear but it's time to switch gears," said Red Constantino of Greenpeace.
"We have a clear message from most governments that they will take seriously" scientists' calls for deep cuts, said Hans Verolme, climate expert of the WWF.
Kyoto binds 36 industrial nations to cut emissions of greenhouse gases by at least 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12 in a first bid to contain warming.
The United States has not ratified Kyoto, rating it too costly and unfair for excluding 2012 goals for developing states, and thus was not involved in Friday's session. President George W. Bush has separately called a meeting of major emitters in Washington on September 27-28 to work out future cuts.
http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyID=2007-08-31T202715Z_01_L30699785_RTRIDST_0_CANADA-CLIMATE-COL.XML
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Judge orders White House to produce global warming reports
August 21, 2007
A federal judge ordered President George W. Bush's administration to issue two scientific reports on global warming, siding with environmentalists who sued the White House for failing to produce the documents.
U.S. District Court Judge Saundra Armstrong ruled Tuesday that the Bush administration had violated a 1990 law when it failed to meet deadlines for an updated U.S. climate change research plan and impact assessment.
Armstrong set a March 1 deadline for the White House to issue the research plan, which is meant to guide federal research on climate change. Federal law calls for an updated plan every three years, she said. The last one was issued in 2003.
.
The judge set a May 31 deadline to produce a national assessment containing the most recent scientific data on global warming and its projected effects on the country's environment, economy and public health. The government is required to complete a national assessment every four years, the judge ruled. The last one was issued by the Clinton administration in 2000.
.
The administration had claimed that it had discretion over how and when it produced the reports — an argument the judge rejected Tuesday.
"The defendants are wrong," Armstrong wrote in the 38-page ruling. "Congress has conferred no discretion upon the defendants as to when they will issue revised Research Plans and National Assessments."
The plaintiffs — the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace — said the ruling was a rebuke to an administration that has systematically denied and suppressed information on global warming.
"It's a huge victory holding the administration accountable for its attempts to suppress science," said Kassie Siegel, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs that filed suit in Oakland federal court in November.
.
more available here
.
AP
.
A federal judge ordered President George W. Bush's administration to issue two scientific reports on global warming, siding with environmentalists who sued the White House for failing to produce the documents.
U.S. District Court Judge Saundra Armstrong ruled Tuesday that the Bush administration had violated a 1990 law when it failed to meet deadlines for an updated U.S. climate change research plan and impact assessment.
Armstrong set a March 1 deadline for the White House to issue the research plan, which is meant to guide federal research on climate change. Federal law calls for an updated plan every three years, she said. The last one was issued in 2003.
.
The judge set a May 31 deadline to produce a national assessment containing the most recent scientific data on global warming and its projected effects on the country's environment, economy and public health. The government is required to complete a national assessment every four years, the judge ruled. The last one was issued by the Clinton administration in 2000.
.
The administration had claimed that it had discretion over how and when it produced the reports — an argument the judge rejected Tuesday.
"The defendants are wrong," Armstrong wrote in the 38-page ruling. "Congress has conferred no discretion upon the defendants as to when they will issue revised Research Plans and National Assessments."
The plaintiffs — the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace — said the ruling was a rebuke to an administration that has systematically denied and suppressed information on global warming.
"It's a huge victory holding the administration accountable for its attempts to suppress science," said Kassie Siegel, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs that filed suit in Oakland federal court in November.
.
more available here
.
AP
.
Climate Change threatens China's food supply
Mary-Anne Toy
Herald Correspondent in Beijing
August 24, 2007
GLOBAL warming will cut China's annual grain harvest by up to 10 per cent, placing extra demands on the country's shrinking farmland and threatening its notion of food security, an official has warned. This would mean China would have to find another 10 million hectares of farmland by 2030, when its population is expected to peak at 1.5 billion.
The head of the State Meteorological Administration, Zheng Guogang, told an agricultural forum in northern China that global warming would increase the cost of production because more money would be needed to fight new insects and diseases.
A onedegree rise would also exacerbate ground-water evaporation by 7 per cent in a country where drought already affects 22 of 31 provinces.
A fall in the grain harvest of up to 10 per cent would mean 30 million to 50 million tonnes less grain at a time when an extra 100 million tonnes of food would be needed to feed an additional 200 million people in 2030, Mr Zheng said.
China has 20 per cent of the world's population but just 7 per cent of its arable land.
Chinese officials have warned that the country is already nearing the "red line" for the minimum amount of arable land needed to ensure the country can meet the bulk of its food needs.
At the end of 2006, China had 121.8 million hectares of arable land, just over the 120 million hectares deemed the minimum requirement by 2010.
Part of the soaring annual growth rate has been due to rapid urbanisation - which has seen the loss of more than 8 million hectares of arable land since 1996 for factories, industrial estates and housing.
Global warming would cause more drought in already dry areas in low-lying and mid-altitude regions because rainfall would drop 10 to 30 per cent by 2030, Mr Zheng said, while wet, high-altitude areas would experience more drastic flooding.
Although climate change would have little impact on wheat production it would cause corn and rice production to fall. Though some places in north-eastern China had increased grain production because warmer winters meant rice could be grown there, most regions' grain output was falling.
Mr Zheng is one of a growing number of experts to warn against the negative impact of global warming. Last month environmental authorities said climate change was shrinking wetlands at the source of China's two greatest rivers - the Yangtze and the Yellow - and other studies found that glaciers, the source for many of Asia's rivers, in north-western China's Xinjiang region and in the Himalayas have been shrinking rapidly. Summer droughts and floods have already affected a fifth of China's arable land this year and agriculture experts have warned that a decline in the autumn harvest - which usually provides 70 per cent of grain production - could fuel inflation.
China's inflation surged to a 10-year high of 5.6 per cent last month on the back of rising grain and other food prices, prompting the Government to lift interest rates for the fourth time this year.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/climate-change-threatens-chinas-food-supply/2007/08/23/1187462441067.html
Herald Correspondent in Beijing
August 24, 2007
GLOBAL warming will cut China's annual grain harvest by up to 10 per cent, placing extra demands on the country's shrinking farmland and threatening its notion of food security, an official has warned. This would mean China would have to find another 10 million hectares of farmland by 2030, when its population is expected to peak at 1.5 billion.
The head of the State Meteorological Administration, Zheng Guogang, told an agricultural forum in northern China that global warming would increase the cost of production because more money would be needed to fight new insects and diseases.
A onedegree rise would also exacerbate ground-water evaporation by 7 per cent in a country where drought already affects 22 of 31 provinces.
A fall in the grain harvest of up to 10 per cent would mean 30 million to 50 million tonnes less grain at a time when an extra 100 million tonnes of food would be needed to feed an additional 200 million people in 2030, Mr Zheng said.
China has 20 per cent of the world's population but just 7 per cent of its arable land.
Chinese officials have warned that the country is already nearing the "red line" for the minimum amount of arable land needed to ensure the country can meet the bulk of its food needs.
At the end of 2006, China had 121.8 million hectares of arable land, just over the 120 million hectares deemed the minimum requirement by 2010.
Part of the soaring annual growth rate has been due to rapid urbanisation - which has seen the loss of more than 8 million hectares of arable land since 1996 for factories, industrial estates and housing.
Global warming would cause more drought in already dry areas in low-lying and mid-altitude regions because rainfall would drop 10 to 30 per cent by 2030, Mr Zheng said, while wet, high-altitude areas would experience more drastic flooding.
Although climate change would have little impact on wheat production it would cause corn and rice production to fall. Though some places in north-eastern China had increased grain production because warmer winters meant rice could be grown there, most regions' grain output was falling.
Mr Zheng is one of a growing number of experts to warn against the negative impact of global warming. Last month environmental authorities said climate change was shrinking wetlands at the source of China's two greatest rivers - the Yangtze and the Yellow - and other studies found that glaciers, the source for many of Asia's rivers, in north-western China's Xinjiang region and in the Himalayas have been shrinking rapidly. Summer droughts and floods have already affected a fifth of China's arable land this year and agriculture experts have warned that a decline in the autumn harvest - which usually provides 70 per cent of grain production - could fuel inflation.
China's inflation surged to a 10-year high of 5.6 per cent last month on the back of rising grain and other food prices, prompting the Government to lift interest rates for the fourth time this year.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/climate-change-threatens-chinas-food-supply/2007/08/23/1187462441067.html
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
Volunteers strip off to fight climate change
August 18, 2007
Hundreds of naked people formed a "living sculpture" on Switzerland's Aletsch Glacier on Saturday, aiming to raise awareness about climate change.
The photo shoot by New York artist Spencer Tunick, famous for his pictures of nude gatherings in public settings worldwide, was designed to draw attention to the effects of global warming on Switzerland's shrinking glaciers.
"The melting of the glaciers is an indisputable sign of global climate change," said environmental group Greenpeace, which co-organised the event. It said most Swiss glaciers would disappear by 2080 if global warming continues at its current pace.
The organisation added that it hoped the event and the pictures would make politicians and the population aware of looming dangers as average temperatures rise.
"We need to act now before it is too late," said Greenpeace campaign director Markus Allemann. He pointed out that alpine glaciers had already lost one third of their surface and half of their mass over the past 150 years.
The organisers said they wanted to establish a symbolic relationship between the vulnerability of the melting glacier and the human body.
The event, which followed Tunick's recent shoots in London, Mexico City and Amsterdam, was designed to minimise any impact on the environment, Greenpeace said.
The participants, all volunteers recruited earlier this summer by the environmental organisation, had to walk about four hours to reach the site of the shoot.
Temperatures hovered around ten degrees Celsius while the photos were being taken, but nobody spent much time with their clothes off. A first picture was taken with 300 volunteers standing beside the glacier, before 600 people moved for another shot onto the ice itself.
The 40-year-old photographer has made a name for himself in recent years for his pictures of large groups of naked people, mostly in urban environments.
His first shoot was in New York in 1992, but he has also taken his signature photos in Switzerland in the past, including in Basel in 1999, Fribourg in 2001 and at the national exhibition in Neuchâtel in 2002.
swissinfo with agencies
"The melting of the glaciers is an indisputable sign of global climate change," said environmental group Greenpeace, which co-organised the event. It said most Swiss glaciers would disappear by 2080 if global warming continues at its current pace.
The organisation added that it hoped the event and the pictures would make politicians and the population aware of looming dangers as average temperatures rise.
"We need to act now before it is too late," said Greenpeace campaign director Markus Allemann. He pointed out that alpine glaciers had already lost one third of their surface and half of their mass over the past 150 years.
The organisers said they wanted to establish a symbolic relationship between the vulnerability of the melting glacier and the human body.
The event, which followed Tunick's recent shoots in London, Mexico City and Amsterdam, was designed to minimise any impact on the environment, Greenpeace said.
The participants, all volunteers recruited earlier this summer by the environmental organisation, had to walk about four hours to reach the site of the shoot.
Temperatures hovered around ten degrees Celsius while the photos were being taken, but nobody spent much time with their clothes off. A first picture was taken with 300 volunteers standing beside the glacier, before 600 people moved for another shot onto the ice itself.
The 40-year-old photographer has made a name for himself in recent years for his pictures of large groups of naked people, mostly in urban environments.
His first shoot was in New York in 1992, but he has also taken his signature photos in Switzerland in the past, including in Basel in 1999, Fribourg in 2001 and at the national exhibition in Neuchâtel in 2002.
swissinfo with agencies
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Is extreme weather due to climate change?
25 July 2007
BBC
With parts of Europe baking in a heatwave, while parts of England are experiencing their worst flooding for 60 years, it is tempting to ascribe this extreme weather to climate change.
Parts of Europe have been sweltering in record temperaturesBut climate scientists are reluctant to make this link.
"You can say that due to the Earth getting warmer there will be on average more extreme events," said Dr Malcolm Haylock, an expert on climate extremes, "but you can't attribute any specific event to climate change."
This month, hundreds of people have died in a heatwave that has swept across south-eastern Europe. Wildfires have raged across Greece, confounding attempts to contain them.
Meanwhile, severe floods have brought chaos to parts of England, forcing hundreds of homes to be evacuated.
Growing consensus
There is a growing consensus, based on past climate records and other data, that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the Earth's climate.
Homes around England have been evacuated following the floodsMany climate scientists now believe the data points to global temperatures rising by between 1.1C and 6.4C by the end of this century.
But as far as the droughts and floods are concerned, climate scientists have found it more difficult to attribute long-term trends in rainfall to human activities.
European weather is affected by a climate system called the North Atlantic Oscillation. This describes changes in atmospheric pressure at sea level as measured over Iceland and over the Azores.
"Over the last 50 years or so, there's been a trend to lower pressures over Iceland and higher pressures over the Azores in winter, although this trend has reduced in recent years," said Dr Haylock, who works for re-insurer PartnerRe in Zurich, Switzerland, and is formerly of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, UK.
Firefighters have struggled to hold back the flames in GreeceThe impact of this climate system reaches from the upper atmosphere to the bottom of the ocean.
But its most obvious impact over the last half century is a trend towards drier conditions in southern Europe and more extreme rainfall in northern Europe during winter.
Its effects during other seasons, such as summer, are not as clear. Local weather systems seem to play a larger role here.
Computer models
Dr Haylock said that recent changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation could not be linked to human-induced climate change.
Scientists simply do not have the long-term measurements to say either way.
Climate models can be used to predict future climate variationOn the other hand, there is a growing consensus that the recent changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation will continue in the future, leading to winter storms in Europe tending to move further north and drier conditions in southern Europe.
Computer models suggest that, as the climate gets hotter over the coming decades, the available water in the landmass of Europe may be reduced. This may in turn have knock on effects for global temperatures.
"When we run these climate models for future years, we find we were getting very, very hot days. These were so hot, they can't be explained just by more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere," said Dr Haylock.
"Water on the ground cools the atmosphere around it a lot, and once this has dried out, the temperatures just accelerate. So there is some concern that these hot days may become more frequent over the next decade, but that is still uncertain."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6915309.stm
BBC
With parts of Europe baking in a heatwave, while parts of England are experiencing their worst flooding for 60 years, it is tempting to ascribe this extreme weather to climate change.
Parts of Europe have been sweltering in record temperaturesBut climate scientists are reluctant to make this link.
"You can say that due to the Earth getting warmer there will be on average more extreme events," said Dr Malcolm Haylock, an expert on climate extremes, "but you can't attribute any specific event to climate change."
This month, hundreds of people have died in a heatwave that has swept across south-eastern Europe. Wildfires have raged across Greece, confounding attempts to contain them.
Meanwhile, severe floods have brought chaos to parts of England, forcing hundreds of homes to be evacuated.
Growing consensus
There is a growing consensus, based on past climate records and other data, that greenhouse gas emissions are warming the Earth's climate.
Homes around England have been evacuated following the floodsMany climate scientists now believe the data points to global temperatures rising by between 1.1C and 6.4C by the end of this century.
But as far as the droughts and floods are concerned, climate scientists have found it more difficult to attribute long-term trends in rainfall to human activities.
European weather is affected by a climate system called the North Atlantic Oscillation. This describes changes in atmospheric pressure at sea level as measured over Iceland and over the Azores.
"Over the last 50 years or so, there's been a trend to lower pressures over Iceland and higher pressures over the Azores in winter, although this trend has reduced in recent years," said Dr Haylock, who works for re-insurer PartnerRe in Zurich, Switzerland, and is formerly of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, UK.
Firefighters have struggled to hold back the flames in GreeceThe impact of this climate system reaches from the upper atmosphere to the bottom of the ocean.
But its most obvious impact over the last half century is a trend towards drier conditions in southern Europe and more extreme rainfall in northern Europe during winter.
Its effects during other seasons, such as summer, are not as clear. Local weather systems seem to play a larger role here.
Computer models
Dr Haylock said that recent changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation could not be linked to human-induced climate change.
Scientists simply do not have the long-term measurements to say either way.
Climate models can be used to predict future climate variationOn the other hand, there is a growing consensus that the recent changes in the North Atlantic Oscillation will continue in the future, leading to winter storms in Europe tending to move further north and drier conditions in southern Europe.
Computer models suggest that, as the climate gets hotter over the coming decades, the available water in the landmass of Europe may be reduced. This may in turn have knock on effects for global temperatures.
"When we run these climate models for future years, we find we were getting very, very hot days. These were so hot, they can't be explained just by more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere," said Dr Haylock.
"Water on the ground cools the atmosphere around it a lot, and once this has dried out, the temperatures just accelerate. So there is some concern that these hot days may become more frequent over the next decade, but that is still uncertain."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6915309.stm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
